I was watching ESPN when at the bottom of the screen it said Jon Brockman: 0 points, 14 rebounds. It's weird seeing someone mentioned without scoring any points but its clear this guy can board and make an impact. My point is Brockman(drafted 38th in 09) has had a much bigger impact than the lottery PF's Blake Griffin and Jordan Hill. I know Blake is hurt but it's still important to note how weird the NBA draft is. Oh and the man drafted one spot ahead of Brockman is DeJuan Blair, who's having a great rookie year as well.
Another player that knows how to play basketball but cuz everyone knew the negatives to him he was overlooked 37 times. This is a nice example of why sometimes it is better to know a players weaknesses than to not know them.
brockman can rebound, that's it. Maybe he could have gone a little higher, but I'm certain 30 out of 30 gm's would still take griffin and hill over brockman if the draft was done again today.
brockman can be paul millsap type of player(less scoring) and i think that some teams didnt drafted him cause hes 6.7 and comes from relative small college but the fact is that hes a great rebounder and he hustle on court
I really like Brockman. He was awesome in high school, awesome at Washington, and I knew he would be able to rebound in the L. He just needs to add a nice mid range jumper and you will be looking at a great BACK UP Power Forward. Has a great nose for the ball and never takes plays off
Guys, I just saw Jon Brockman live at the arena, playing big minutes here in Charlotte against the Bobcats. The kid's just a brute, and I mean that in a positive way. With so much offensive fire power in Sac-town, he fits right in as a complement.
Brockman didn't measure with the height or length to be a good nba rebounder. But I guess it doesn't matter.
The moral of the story is this: Great college rebounding numbers against good competition DO translate into nba production. Look at DeJuan Blair. Disregarding the knee issues, a lot of people figured he was too short and not quick enough to guard the new breed of nba power forward. Didn't matter. TRUST THE REBOUNDING NUMBERS IN COLLEGE.
Great rebounding at one's given position shows that they have desire, and that they can handle the athleticism of the next level.
I've been big on Brockman as a blue collar rebounding type guy for a long time. I think anyone who watched him in college knew that despite the fact he's only 6'7'' wouldn't stop him from being a good rebounder in the NBA. There were rumors he was gonna sneak in the late 1st round last season. Brockman's rebounding will keep him in the league as a Reggie Evans type player, but if he works on his shot and gets a 10-15 footer he could really increase his stock as a player.
I know I saw some poor length measurements for Brockman at one point, but now I can't find them online.
Another kid with poor length measurements was Jared Dudley. But these guys just have "nose for the ball".
They likely have superior strength/ability to stay balanced while withstanding force, moreso than most nba players. This, combined with hustle, desire, and IQ, is how they overcome poor length.
I started a thread on this subject after the draft. I compared both DuJuan Blair and Brockman with the Paul Milsap draft scenario. If you will recall, Milsap wasn't taken until the middle of the 2nd round. Why?
There is no simple answer but here are a couple of my theories.
1. NBA GMs are enamored with offense, unless they're looking at a 7 footer, they underrate the value of great rebounding and defense.
2. Many NBA GMs just aren't very bright. Year after year I watch the selections they make and then I have to ask myself what they were thinking at the time. I'm sure all of us can cite one ridiculous draft choice after another over the years.
3. If you look at the history of the NBA, some of the great rebounders were relatively short guys who couldn't jump 6 inches off the ground. Rebounding is all about intelligence, desire, strength, and positioning.
Off the top of my head, here are some great NBA rebounders who were relatively short for their position and they couldn't jump.
Dejuan Blair and Jon Brockman were labeled as short and unathletic coming into the draft last year. The guy that immediately comes to mind regarding this years draft is Luke Harangody. A great rebounder in the big East and a much better scorer than these two other guys were in college. He won't be near the productive scorer in the NBA but just like blair and brockman this man knows how to rebound and hustle.
I completely agree with your assessment of Luke Harangody, who's buried deep in the NBADraft.net mock 2nd round. In my opinion, Harangody will be an excellent role player in the NBA and merits a slot at the end of the first or very early in the 2nd round.
I will admit it, when brockman was drafted i thought the NBA had found a new worst player. Jon Brockman, from my family to yours, I'm sorry.
Brockman's entirely one-dimensional. Am I missing something, here? He's Danny Fortson all over again.
There's little value to a player like that. Brockman can't defend or score, and he fouls far too often. He's not a "beyond the box score" type at all. His contributions fall squarely into one column of the box score.
The bottom line, he was a good second round pick. But don't go comparing him to Blair, a very talented overall player who has proven a talented low post scorer and great defender alongside being a great rebounder. Brockman hasn't reached double digits all year and his defensive contributions are essentially his six fouls.
Way different than Danny Fortson, Danny Fortson was the 10th pick overall and had a couple productive years before becoming complaicent with being fat and lazy. Brockman is an overachiever with a great work ethic. He may not be as much of an offensive player yet, but in the last 5 games alone when his minutes have gone up he has grabbed over 5 offensive rebounds in 3 of those games ( 7 in two of them ). I don't liken him to Blair, but more Reggie Evans or a better Michael Ruffin, but a guy who rebounds like he can should get some credit as a defensive player, after all a defensive rebound ends an offensive possession. But you are right he is a good 2nd round pick and a career role player, but I think he'll have a better career than Gerald Henderson.
I agree with the Evans comparison. What I meant by likening him to Fortson was that they both provided the same thing: Rebounding and not much more.
Every year, there are going to be a few secound rounders who should have been picked in the first, like Blair. And every year, there are going to be a few first rounders who should have been picked in the second, like Terrence Williams. (I'll hold off on Henderson until he actually gets some playing time.)
But before we start making judgments that because Brockman is clearly one of the top-30 rookies based on output this season, he should have been a first rounder, we should give it time. Brockman has a very, very low ceiling, as did Evans. He fills a niche, nothing more.
There's no way I would take Brockman ahead of a player like Jordan Hill, who has actually done quite a lot in VERY limited minutes for the stupid Knicks. (Aside: Hill's numbers per 36 minutes: 16 points, 9 rebounds, 2 blocks, 2 steals. Granted, he hasn't played enough for those numbers to mean too much, but it's enough output in limited time that he deserves some run with a lottery-bound team.)
The other thing about Brockman is, the player drafted immediately after him, Jonas Jerebko, has played at least as well as Brockman so far this year and has far more potential. And if you're looking for second-round picks who were NBA ready from day one and were available for the Kings at No. 38, look no further than Chase Budinger and Marcus Thornton.
Brockman was not a genius pick. He was an acceptable, solid pick for a team that probably would have been better off trying to get some help for the future by taking a guy like Jerebko or Derrick Brown because they had to know they were not making the playoffs this year.
I agree with Adi here. I think Brockman is a 10th-12 man type who rebounds and provides nothing else. He has very little upside as an overachiever, and I don't think he will be looked at as a player picked too low in the future..
Jordan Hill looked alright for NY vs Detroit yesterday....
Although I agree with Adi_Joseph's description of Brockman as one dimensional, he left out a very important point. If you're a team that cannot rebound, a guy like Brockman coming off the bench to grab those much needed boards has a certain amount of value. On the right team, that one dimension may be exactly what they need in a role player.
I also don't necessarily agree that Blair would have been a top twenty pick if it weren't for his knees. That sounds like a very plausible reason, but think back to a very healthy Paul Milsap who led the NCAA in rebounding 3 years in a row, but he also fell to the middle/end of the 2nd round [#47]. I truly believe that unless we're talking about a 7 footer, NBA GMs are too enamored with offense and don't put enough value on tough guys who rebound.
As a little aside, I read an article about Sacramento practices where the players apparently argue because nobody wants to guard Jon Brockman, who practices just like he plays, repeatedly knocking bodies out of his way.
If Brockman can tighten up his jumper out to 18 ft., he'll be an Udonis Haslem clone. Dude can rebound, set picks, and play physical defense. If you are a master of your 1 skill (boards) you will have a long career in the League.